Towards model-based characterization of individual electrically stimulated nerve fibers
Felsheim, R. C.; Sly, D. J.; OLeary, S. J.; Dietz, M.
Show abstract
Neuroprosthetics, such as cochlear implants or deep brain stimulators, can restore parts of the function of an impaired system. To improve such prosthetics, a detailed understanding of the electrical stimulation of nerve fibers is required. This knowledge can best be represented by computational models of the process. Currently, most models of individual electrically stimulated nerve fibers are based on many different datasets, which mainly consist of the average analysis values of recordings of many nerve fibers. While this is a valid approach for understanding the basic phenomena, both the combination of many different datasets and the average analysis can confound details in the response of the nerve fiber. To improve computational models of electrically stimulated nerve fibers further, we propose an optimization procedure that can fit the parameters of a neuron model to the response of a single nerve fiber to pulse-train stimulation. We show that in this way, the model can reproduce a wide variety of fiber responses of electrically stimulated auditory nerve fibers of guinea pigs in a remarkably detailed way on a scale of less than 1 ms. We analyze and discuss the certainty and generalizability of the parameter sets thus exposed. The model parameters found by the optimization procedure can then form the basis for a detailed fiber-by-fiber analysis, which we illustrate by a correlation analysis of the predicted phenomena (e.g., spike latency and refractory period) in the fiber response. Author SummaryNeuroprosthetics can partially restore the function of an impaired neural system. Examples of such prosthetics are cochlear implants, which allow deaf people to hear, or deep-brain stimulators, which can reduce the tremor in Parkinsons disease. While the mere existence of such prosthetics is already impressive, there is still room for improvement. Cochlear implant users, for example, have problems understanding speech in background noise, and deep-brain stimulators can have serious side effects, such as speech difficulties or limited fine motor control. To improve such implants, a detailed understanding of the underlying process, the electrical stimulation of nerve fibers, is required. A valuable representation of our understanding of the process is a computational model of electrically stimulated nerve fibers. Here, we optimized the parameters of one model, such that the behavior of 118 individual nerve fibers was represented, resulting in a single parameter set per fiber. In this way, a single model can reproduce a wide variety of response patterns, which allows for a detailed analysis of the individual fiber based on these parameters.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Simulation Insights on the Compound Action Potential in Multifascicular Nerves 96%
- HippoUnit: A software tool for the automated testing and systematic comparison of detailed models of hippocampal neurons based on electrophysiological data 94%
- Circuits and mechanisms for TMS-induced corticospinal waves: Connecting sensitivityanalysis to the network graph 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Statistical Characterization of Cortical-Thalamic Dynamics Evoked by Cortical Stimulation in Mice 94%
- Combining biophysical models and machine learning to optimize implant geometry and stimulation protocol for intraneural electrodes 94%
- Deep brain stimulation pulse sequences to optimally modulate frequency-specific neural activity 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- A convolutional neural network for estimating synaptic connectivity from spike trains 93%
- Phenomenological models of NaV1.5. A side by side, procedural, hands-on comparison between Hodgkin-Huxley and kinetic formalisms. 92%
- Dynamics of a neuronal pacemaker in the weakly electric fish Apteronotus 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.